I was sitting in a lunch room with an intern (a nice young male) who turned to me as he was reading a circular distributed throughout government ran research institutes which discussed various scientists and their research, after reading an article about a young female scientist, he said to me: how do you impress her? After looking briefly at the photo accompanying the article I saw what he meant, she had a PhD, she looked attractive and she was doing bleeding edge research.

I said: she probably wants to marry a motor mechanic. But the reality is who she chooses and why is her business.

But I think this anecdote kinda explains why men don't want women competing with them in the work place because how on earth are they going to impress us?

The mechanism goes something like this: men do stuff which they do to attract a mate and only once the woman is sure the man is a good potential partner should she have sex with him. The requirements traditionally have been the male will stay around long enough to help her raise their children, provide adequate income and be sufficiently companionable while doing so. By that I mean, he will help rather than hinder the raising of (any) children. Varying women will make different choices.

Only once the man has convinced the woman he will be a useful and worthwhile breeding partner should the woman have sex (and reproduce) with the man. Hence slut shaming, i.e. she gave in to suitors too easily. The woman should ultimately be the gate to select whose genetic material makes it into the next generation.

Associated with this mechanism was urging women to 'need' a partner and this indoctrination begins at a very early age with fairy tales of princes waking sleeping princesses etc. Also it is sound economically as Jane Austen pointed out repeatedly in her books. Without a partner the woman will be in dire financial straights while raising her child(ren) and will be ran off her feet doing cooking, cleaning, and caring while working to support herself and her child(ren).

However since in the west women get to chose their partners it means women will be selecting for traits they find desirable, primarily for the ability to support her, thus men chase money at the expense of everything because it will give him more breeding opportunities.

Of course this is average behavior, however the most desirable breeding partners for men are women who society deems most attractive and hence men often select women by appearance. Again this is average behavior. Average behavior also means, yes there will be plenty of counter examples, but in general, there is a trend.

This puts pressure on women to be easy to impress. This is why it has been traditionally difficult for women to get education, work opportunities, advancement, independent income, property and achievements. And by the same phenomena it has meant lifting men up to make it easier for them to impress and get access to breeding opportunities.

This is an addendum to my piece about the trouble with men. This is society killing multiple birds with one stone.

This may also be the reason why women are against feminism because men may start thinking they can get better wives than a woman who only considers herself a housewife and mother. We need to stop the one-size-fits-all approach to society. We are all different and have different needs. Some women have had partners who have become incapacitated and are no longer able to work, die or leave for whatever reason and need to be able to continue to support themselves and their family.

Selecting for men purely based on earning capacity is both insulting to men and women. Men are not merely beings that produce money and should do so at the cost of the environment and other human beings. Men need companionable wives too. Women must select partners who enrich them in other ways other than just financially. Once women have equal access to money, women can select for men who are superior ethically.